View Single Post
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-04-2012, 13:17
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,731
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: New District Events for 2013?

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevend1994 View Post
I think the big thing is that FIRST NEEDS to keep some places out of the district system in order to sustain international growth in places where there just aren't enough teams to have a system in place. Regionals like NYC, LA, and others that are filled with international teams need to stay in place. Also, they need to make the barriers moreso regional than "State XXXX, State XXXX, and parts of State XXXX", or if that is done, they need to allow for a circumstantial opt-out, in which a team can put in a request to opt out of the district system. This comes to my mind based off teams in the western half of Canada, because (with my extreme lack of knowledge in Canadian geography...) it seems like a lot of Canada is densely populated in the eastern half near Toronto. A district system that encompasses all of Canada would just hurt teams that go to regionals moreso on the western half of North America.
Western Canada is being talked about for a Pacific Northwest area--Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and possibly part or all of Montana (and I already made my comments on which would probably be preferred), plus western Canada, instead of putting western Canada with Toronto.

I think the request to opt out, or more likely a request for another district assignment (e.g. New England instead of New York or Wisconsin instead of Michigan) is a really good way to go.

I've also already addressed the international/sparse area question. For these areas, there are a couple of options. Either you include them in the district that they usually end up in anyway (meaning they stay in the States for a week and a half, or go home and come back) or you give them a single event qualifying method. Or you let them go to any two district events, regardless of qualification area.

Oh, and BTW: Los Angeles is not "filled with international teams". This year, 66 teams attended. Brazil: 1. Chile: 1. That's 3%. Another team came from Nevada. Grand total 4.5% of teams were from out of state; most if not all of the rest were from Southern CA (AKA, half a state). That's pretty typical--you might get up to half a dozen out of state teams. Oh, and another regional is going to be added in the area. If that's not an argument to turn the L.A. Regional into a district system, I don't know what is! That said, I would not object to allowing international teams to play--the Chilean team's "home" regional is Los Angeles. But then you get back to the international travel dilemma.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk

Reply With Quote